Bchav. Kes. si Therapy. 1968, Vol. 6. pp. 139 to 445. Pergamon Press.

Printed in England

MODIFICATION OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR

THROUGH VARIABLE INTERVAL REINFORCEMENT
IN A QUASI-THERAPY SITUATION*

LAURENCE P. INCE
New York University Medical Center, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine,
Goldwater Memorial Hospital, Welfare Island, New York 10017

(Received 23 April 1968)

Summary-Principles from the operant conditioning laboratory were applied to the verbal behavior of
female college students. An experimental setting was designed to replicate a psychotherapist’s ofice, and
subjects were seen daily in a study using a functional research design. Variable interval reinforcement
was employed to modify the rate of emission of positive self-reference statements. Results demonstrated
that the verbal, scheduled reinforcement exerted a definite, marked effect on the verbal behavior of the
subjects. All subjects conditioned to the schedules. Sequence of scheduling did not appear to be a significant
variable. The feasibility of employing such techniques in actual psychotherapy is discussed.

INTRODUCTION
FOLLOWING the initial research by Greenspoon (1954, 1955) in the area of verbal con-
ditioning, many studies have demonstrated that the verbal behavior of human subjects
can be manipulated through the reinforcing behavior of an experimenter (Krasner,
I958 ; Salzinger, 1959; Greenspoon, 1962). This has been done with a variety of verbal
response classes, ranging from simple ones such as “I”, “we” pronouns to more complex
ones such as attitudes (Hildum and Brown, 1956) and opinion statement (Verplanck,
1955). Since these early studies investigators have progressed from employing continuous
reinforcement to schedules of reinforcement (Solley and Santos, 1958; Kanfer and
Marston, 1962; Kapostins, 1963).
Despite the amount of research done it must be noted the majority of the research
has been directed at conditioning verbal behavior in the experimental laboratory without
attempting to extend the findings to more “practical” settings. While it is important to
demonstrate that verbal behavior is amenable to the same reinforcement principles as
other human behavior, it is additionally important to seek application of the methods in
the various life situations of the individuals involved. Bridging the gap between the
laboratory and extra-laboratory situations is necessary if the area is to have meaning in
any therapeutic sense. Recent research by Truax (1966), in which significant reinforcement
effects were found in an analysis of client-centered therapy, supports this view.
There have been studies which have attempted to make the laboratory situation
resemble a therapeutic one either by the types of responses dealt with, or by the arrange-
ment of the experimental room, or both. Grossman (1962) reinforced expressions of

* This study is based on a dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of Florida State University
in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, and was conducted while
the author was a student at that University.

439
440 LAURENCE P. ISCE

feeling in a psychotherapy setting. Rogers (1960) conditioned positive and negative self-
reference statements in a situation resembling a clinical interview. In a similar setting
Salzinger and Pisoni (1958) reinforced affect responses containing certain pronouns.
Ince (1968) conditioned positive self-reference statements in a setting designed to resemble
actual counseling. Most recently, Williams and Blanton (1968) conditioned feeling state-
ments in a simulated psychotherapy setting.
It must be pointed out, however, that with the exception of Ince’s (1968) study, the
above investigations employed a factorial, or actuarial experimental design. Although
the feasibility of employing a behavioral approach in psychotherapy has been discussed
in the literature (Bandura, 1961; Grossberg, 1964), it appears that a research design
which studies individual behavior over time is most relevant, as this is the way psycho-
therapy is generally conducted. The present study employed a functional research design
in an attempt to make its findings as relevant to psychotherapy as possible.

METHOD
Subjects
Three undergraduate female students at Florida State University were selected to act
as Ss. Their participation was voluntary, and they were paid 5.25 per session, given
in total at the completion of the experiment.

Apparatus
The experimental room contained a desk and two chairs, with the Ss sitting on the
opposite side of the desk from the E. A microswitch (8051 l-CE, Electrical Specialties)
was mounted on a wooden board, S&x 11 in., and was located under the desk, being
operated by foot by E. Connected to this was a counter (99 g 9511, Lafayette) which
counted the S’s responses, each foot tap by E registering one digit on the counter. The
counter was enclosed in a thick, fiberglass-lined, plywood box, located on the floor next
to E. A tape programmer (LVE 1319FC) was located in an adjoining room. The tape
was programmed for the desired time intervals on the reinforcement schedule. When
each interval elapsed, the programmer turned on a small, red bulb located several feet
above and behind S in the experimental room. This bulb flashed on for a fraction of a
second as a cue to E that the next critical response was to be reinforced. It was out of
sight of S. A Wollensak tape recorder was on the desk in the experimental room to lend
authenticity to the situation, and as a check on the counter. With the exception of the
recorder all equipment was out of sight of S and to all appearances the experimental room
resembled a psychotherapist’s office.

Procedure
Each S was seen individually for 30 miniday, 6 days a week. Ss were informed that
they were taking part in a study aimed at determining how student’s views change as a
function of being in an academic setting. To assure daily attendance, they were told that
it is the day-to-day changes, rather than the long run changes, which are of importance.
When a S entered the room she was asked to be seated and to speak as she wished about
her feelings, ideas, beliefs, attitudes, etc. There were no other instructions, or restrictions
placed upon her behavior. After the first few sessions, instructions were no longer
necessary, as S would enter the room, be seated and begin speaking immediately.
 MODIFICATION OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR THROUGH VARIABLE INTERVAL REINFORCEMENT 441

The response under investigation was designated as positive self-reference statements.

These were defined operationally as beginning with the pronoun “I”, containing no
expression of negation (e.g. “no”, “not”, “nothing”, “never”, etc.) and containing no
expression of doubt (e.g. “maybe”, “if”, “perhaps”, “I think”, etc.). Reinforcement
consisted of E paraphrasing S’s responses whenever the time interval between statements
permitted, or when S’s rate was too rapid to permit this, “good”, or “mmhmm”.
For each S an initial base rate of responding was obtained. During this time no
reinforcement was given for any of S’s verbalizations. This operant period continued
until a stable level of responding had been reached. Stability was judged to have occurred
when S had gone for 3 consecutive days without a change of 5 per cent or greater in
response frequency.
Following the operant period S was shaped by successive approximations using con-
tinuous reinforcement. Thus, at first, all statements beginning with “I” were reinforced.
When S conditioned, only statements which began with “I” and also contained no
negation received reinforcement. Finally, only the critical response was given reinforce-
ment. When a stable level of responding on continuous reinforcement (CRF) was reached,
the Ss were placed on scheduled reinforcement. When stable responding was reached at
the first condition of the schedule, the schedule was shifted to the next condition, and so
on, until all schedule conditions were met.
Two Ss were on a variable interval (VI) schedule of VI 30 set, VI 1, VI 2, and VI 3,
programmed in forward order, and one S was on this same schedule, programmed in
reverse, so as to control for possible effects of sequence in the schedule. When behavior
had stabilized at th? final schedule condition (VI 3 or VI 30 set), S was placed on extinction,
during which period no reinforcements were given for any of S’s statements. Criterion
for extinction was four consecutive sessions, equal to, or approaching S’s original baseline,
without a five per cent or greate, change in response frequency. Following the extinction
phase, the critical response was reinstated in the two forward-run Ss by placing them
back on their reinforcement schedule for one session at each condition of tht schedule.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 1 illustrates the number of responses made by Sl during the experiment, for
each 30-min session, each data point representing one session’s frequency. It can be seen
that a baseline was established in three sessions, and that following the operant period
the introduction of reinforcement resulted in an immediate increase in responding. This
is probably an artifact of the novel stimulus situation. Since E remained silent during the
operant period it is plausible that the mere fact of E speaking, and not necessarily what
he said, resulted in the sudden, rapid increase in S’s responding. Then, as E continued
to respond to S’s verbalizations, his mere speech alone was not sufficient to maintain
the high initial rate, and so responding declined, being dependent now upon E’s specific
reinforcements.
The symbol “A” on the abcissa of the figure refers to the sessions for which S was
reinforced for all statements beginning with “I”; “B” refers to sessions in which responses
which were self-referent and also non-negative were reinforced; “C” represents sessions
in which only the complete, desired response received reinforcement. (These symbols
have the same meaning for all figures). S1 adapted quickly to the schedule, each new
condition resulting in marked increases in responding. Extinction was noted by several
spontaneous recoveries, but was complete by 11 sessions.
441 LAURENCE P. INCE

It can be seen from Fig. 1 that the response was reinstated after it had been extin-
guished. S1 responded at approximately the same rate as during the initial conditioning
period.

R
OPER- c RF “I : “I
ANT A 101 C 30” I I’ 1 2’ I 3’ EXTINCTIOI( Ol, 3
0 5 IO I5 20 25 30 35 40
SESSIONS

FIG. 1. St-Total response frequency per experimental session.

Figure 2 presents the data obtained from S?. While the general topography of the
curve is similar to that of S*, it is observed that S2 took longer to condition at several of

L
180

120

z
rn

5
P 90
m

k!

60

30

OPERANT A
:: “B: c 30’ , I(
“I
, 2’ , 3’ EXT.
k. “I
s ~~l~~z’p~
0 5 IO 15 20 25 30 35 40
SESSIONS

FIG. 2. S?-Total response frequency per experimental session.

 MODlFICATION OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR THROUGH VARIABLE INTERVAL REINFORCEMENT 443

the schedule conditions, and did not reach as high a final response rate as did Si. Sz also
extinguished more rapidly, and did not reach as high a reinstatement rate as during her
original conditioning sessions. This implies that perhaps the ratio of time to reinforce-
ment (t: rf) was “strained” during the reinstatement period, since although the critical
response was reinstated, at the final condition rate declined.
Figure 3 shows that the response curve of the S whose VI schedule was programmed
in reverse, is quite similar to the schedule in forward order for this S as well as for the
other Ss on their schedules. The features of the curve are almost identical, and although
the frequency of responding for S3 was less during the reverse period than during forward
conditions of the schedule, it does not appear that the sequence of the schedule had a
significant effect on her verbal behavior.

CRF “I
ORRAN A , E , C 30’ , I’ , 2’ , S’ , 2’ , I’ , 30” CRF EXTINCT.
0 5 IO I5 20 25 30 35 40 45

SESSIONS

FIG. 3. S-Total response frequency per experimental session.

One important aspect of operant conditioning is the relationship between the frequency
of emitted responses and the frequency of reinforcements, or the response: reinforcement
(R : rf) ratio. Ideally, there should be a high frequency of responding to a low frequency
of reinforcement. From the data presented in Table 1 it can be seen that this did occur.
There was an inverse relationship between frequency of responses and frequency of
reinforcements for all Ss. While at first many reinforcements were required to maintain
and increase the Ss’ verbal behavior, as the experiment progressed, behavior was con-
trolled by a very few reinforcements. As responding increased with each new schedule
shift, the number of reinforcements decreased.
It is interesting to note that for most of the experimental sessions, responding for all
Ss was higher during the first half of each session than during the second half. This may
be because the Ss became satiated on the reinforcers (see Gewirtz and Baer, 1958), or
because they simply ran out of conversation. If the latter is true, then while reinforcement
444 LAURENCE P. INCE

still maintained the rate of emission of the critical response, volume of verbal behavior
in general declined, naturally producing a reduction in emission of the positive self-
reference statements.

TABLE 1. RATIO OF MEAN RESPONSES TO MEAN REIBFORCEMENTS (R : RF)

(Rounded off to nearest whole number)

S’ S’
Exp.
Cond. 1st IS’ 2nd 15’ T 30’ 1st 15’ 2nd 15’ T 30’

Operant 25: 0 18: 0 43: 0 22: 0 16: 0 38: 0

CRF: A 46 :71 42 :61 88 : 132 21 :38 29 145 50 : 83

B 43 : 48 38 :46 81 ~94 33 : 35 17:21 50 : 56
C 39 : 39 33 : 33 72 : 72 27 : 27 22 : 22 49 : 49

VI 30” 38 : 18 66:31 104 : 49 39 : 18 25 : 13 64 :31

VI 1 63 : 13 56 : 12 119 :3 47 : 12 36 : 10 83 : 2’

VI 2 82: 8 60: 7 142 : !5 51: 7 41 : 6 92 : 13

VI 3 91: 5 82: 5 173 : 10 61: 6 59: 5 120: II

Ext. 46: 0 42: 0 88: 0 25: 0 26:O 51:O

Reinst.
CRF 60 : 60 53 : 53 113 : 113 30 : 30 20 : 20 50 : 50
VI 30” 71 :24 56 : 19 127 : 43 38 : 18 29 : IO 67 : 28
VI 1 72 : I2 60 : 13 132 : 25 41 : 10 48 : 13 89 : 23
VI 2 77 : 12 64 : 12 141 : 24 50: 7 43: 7 93 : 14
VI 3 93: 6 77: 5 170 : 11 33 : 5 36: 5 69 : 10

s
Operant
18: 0 14: 0 32: 0

CRF: A 32 :44 26 : 40 58 : 84
B 23 : 29 24 : 26 47 : 55
C 30 : 30 20 : 20 50 : 50
Rev. 26 : 26 33 : 33 59 : 59

VI 30” 33 : 19 24 : 15 57 : 34
Rev. 33 : 16 28 : 13 61 :29

VI 1 45 : 15 30 : 11 75 : 26
Rev. 37 : 11 31 : 10 68 :21

VI 2 44 : 10 40: 9 84 : 19
Rev. 44: 8 28: 8 72 : 16

VI 3 50: 6 43: 5 93 : II

Ext. 19: 0 18: 0 37: 0

 MODIFICATION OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR THROUGH VARIABLE INTERVAL REINFORCEMENT 445

There seems to be evidence in the present study to support the possible use of verbal
conditioning procedures in actual psychotherapy. The experimental room resembled a
psychotherapist’s office and all apparatus which was used remained out of the S’s view.
The sessions consisted of verbal exchanges on a one-to-one basis, which is the “stuff”
psychotherapy is made of. The reinforcer, paraphrasing, bears similarity to the “reflection”
of client-centered therapists, and many psychoanalysts say little more than “mmhmm”
in their sessions. To an outside observer, the experimental sessions would not have
appeared different from actual psychotherapy. (An interesting sidelight of this study was
that several of the Ss told E that they felt “much better” after their sessions because of
the help they got in talking things over with a T!)
As Truax (1966) demonstrated, a T may be, and often probably is, reinforcing
certain verbal statements of their clients or patients, without realization of this on the
part of the T. It has long been known that in addition to verbal reinforcements,
behavior such as a smile, or a head nod, can produce modifications in human verbal
behavior. It certainly behooves the psychotherapist to be aware of the powerful reinforcing
effects his actions can have on the behavior of his patients, and rather than ignore this
effect, or decry it, to make the fullest possible use of it through presenting reinforcements
systematically and appropriately.

REFERENCES
BANDURA A. (1961) Psychotherapy as a learning process. Psychol. Bull. 58, 143-149.
GEWIRTZ J. L. and BAER D. M. (1958) Deprivation and satiation of social reinforcers as drive conditions.
J. abnorm. sot. Psychol. 57, 167-172.
GREENSP~~NJ. (1954) The effect of two nonverbal stimuli on the frequency of members of two response
classes. Am. Psychol. 9, 384.
GREENSP~~N J. (1955) The reinforcing effect of two spoken sounds on the frequency of two responses.
Am. J. Psychol. 68, 409416.
GREENSP~~N J. (1962) Verbal conditioning and clinical psychology. In Experimental Foundations of
Clinical Psychology
(Ed. A. J. BACHRACH),pp. 510-553. Basic Books, New York.
GROSSBERGJ. M. (1964) Behavior therapy: A review. Psychof. Bull. 62,73-88.
GROSSMAND. (1962) An experimental investigation of a psychotherapeutic technique. J. consult. Psychol.
16, 325-33 1.
HILDUMD. C. and BROWNR. W. (1956) Verbal reinforcement and interviewer bias. J. abnorm. sot. PsychoL
53, 108-111.
INCE L.P. (1968) The effects of fixed interval reinforcement on the frequency of a verbal response class in
a quasi-counseling situation. J. counsel Psycho!. 15, 140-146.
KANFER F. H. and MARSTONA. R. (1962) Control of verbal behavior by multiple schedules. Psychol.
Rep. 10, 703-710.
KAPOSTINSE. E. (1963) The effects of drl schedules on some characteristics of word utterance. J. exp.
Analysis Behav. 6, 281-290.
KRA~NERI.. (1958) Studies of the conditioning of verbal behavior. Psychol. Bull. 15, 148-171.
ROGERSJ. M. (1960) Operant conditioning in a quasi-therapy setting. J. abnorm. sot. Psychol. 60,247-252.
SALZINGERK. (1559) Experimental manipulation of verbal behavior. J. genet. Psychof. 61, 65-95.
SALZINGERK. and PEONI STEPHANIE(1958) Reinforcement of affect responses of schizophrenics during
the clinical interview. J. abnorm. sot. Psychol. 57, 84-94.
SOLLEYC. M. and SANTOS J. F. (1958) Perceptual learning with partial verbal reinforcement. Percept. mot.
Skills 8, 183-193.
TRUAXC. B. (1966) Reinforcement and Nonreinforcement in Rogerian Psychotherapy. J. abnorm. Psychol.
71, l-9.
VERPLANCKW. S. (1955) The control of the content of conversation: reinforcement of statements of opinion.
/. abnorm. sot. Psycho/. 51, 668-676.
WILLIAMSR. I. and BLANTONR. L. (1968) Verbal conditioning in a psychotherapeutic situation. Behav.
Res. & Therapy 6, 97-103.